15 January 2012

This is an UNCERTIFIED copy for information/reference. For authentic copy please refer to certified copy only. In case of any mistake, please bring it to the notice of Deputy Registrar(Copying).

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

?Court No. - 33

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 598 of 2012

Petitioner :- Gautam Kumar Srivastava

Respondent :- State Of U.P. & Others

Petitioner Counsel :- Agnihotri Kumar Tripathi,Anil Singh Bishen

Respondent Counsel :- C.S.C.,C.N. Tripathi,R.A. Akhtar

Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J.

Petitioner has challenged validity of Clause 1(1) (Kha) of Notification dated 23.8.2010 and Clause 1 (1) (Kha) of Notification dated 29.7.2011 whereby it provides that a person, to be eligible for appointment on the post of Teacher in Primary School, will have to undergo a training which shall be conducted by appropriate Government in accordance with guidelines framed by NCTE. It is contended that this part of Regulation is ultra vires of the Basic Education Act, 1972 which confers power upon State Government to permit Basic Education Board for conducting such examination.

The submission is thoroughly misconceived. In exercise of powers under Section 23 of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009, National Council of Teachers Education has been named as Authorized Authority to lay down minimum qualification in furtherance thereof it has recognized Teachers Eligibility Test which is conducted by State Government. It cannot be said the said provision in any manner is repugnant to the Provincial Statue and in any case if that is so, the Central Statute has to prevail for the reason that State Act has not been given Presidential consent and therefore under Article 252 of the Constitution it is the Central Act which shall prevail.

Prima facie I am not satisfied that there is any irregularity or illegality in the aforesaid two provisions.